President-elect Donald Trump’s recent appointment of Florida Congressman Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor has signaled a significant shift in the United States’ foreign policy priorities, potentially setting the stage for heightened tensions with China. Waltz, an Army Green Beret veteran and former Pentagon strategist, has stressed the importance of refocusing U.S. foreign policy to address what he and his co-authors describe as the “greater threat” posed by China, as outlined in a pre-election article for The Economist.
Waltz’s recommendation to swiftly resolve conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East underscores a pivot away from longstanding geopolitical engagements, aiming to reorient U.S. military and strategic resources toward a potential standoff with the Chinese Communist Party. This strategic rebalancing marks an era where the U.S. will likely engage more assertively in the Indo-Pacific region, raising questions about the future of U.S.-China relations and its broader implications for global stability.
In The Economist article co-authored with Matthew Kroenig, a former Pentagon strategist, Waltz refers to China as America’s “greatest rival” and advocates for a fundamental reorientation of U.S. strategic priorities. “The next president should act urgently to bring the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East to a swift conclusion and finally focus strategic attention where it should be: countering the greater threat from the Communist Party,” he and Kroenig wrote.
This recommendation stems from growing concerns within certain U.S. foreign policy circles that China’s expanding economic and military capabilities could pose a threat to the current international order and American interests in the Asia-Pacific region. The article emphasizes that the U.S. has not sufficiently fortified its defenses against a Chinese attack on Taiwan, a potential flashpoint in U.S.-China relations. According to Waltz and Kroenig, the U.S. has “cut defense spending in real terms, allowing the balance of power to shift in China’s favor.” As a result, the authors advocate for increased defense spending and the revitalization of the defense-industrial base to deter any Chinese aggression toward Taiwan.
Waltz’s selection as National Security Advisor brings a unique blend of military experience and a hardline stance on foreign policy to Trump’s West Wing. As a combat veteran who served in Afghanistan and as an active Green Beret, Waltz has a background that informs his hawkish views on both foreign policy and national security. Before joining Congress, he held key advisory positions in the Department of Defense and advised Vice President Dick Cheney during the George W. Bush administration.
With a focus on countering authoritarian influence abroad, Waltz has repeatedly warned of the strategic threats posed by both China and Russia, though his recent statements indicate that China represents the more pressing issue. This appointment suggests that Trump’s administration could adopt a policy stance that prioritizes competition with China, placing less emphasis on other global conflicts where the U.S. has historically been heavily invested.
If Waltz’s advice to deprioritize conflicts in Europe and the Middle East to focus on China is adopted, Trump’s second term will likely see significant changes in U.S. foreign policy. Since 2018, the Trump administration has engaged in a series of confrontations with China, beginning with a trade war that saw each country impose tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars worth of each other’s goods. The tensions escalated with diplomatic actions, including the tit-for-tat closures of consulates in Houston and Chengdu, as well as controversies over espionage and cybersecurity.
By redirecting strategic resources away from the Middle East, Waltz’s strategy proposes that the U.S. military and diplomatic efforts be concentrated in Asia. This reallocation would not only impact U.S.-China relations but could also influence relations with other key regional players, including Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and Australia.
One of the most contentious issues in U.S.-China relations remains the question of Taiwan. Waltz and Kroenig argue that a strong U.S. presence is necessary to deter China from acting on its longstanding claim over Taiwan. “America is not building armed forces to deny a Chinese attack on Taiwan,” they wrote, arguing that without increased defense funding and a more robust defense-industrial base, the U.S. might struggle to counter an emboldened China in the Asia-Pacific.
As China has ramped up its military spending and developed more advanced capabilities, particularly in naval and missile technology, the balance of power in the region has shifted. China’s frequent military exercises near Taiwan and its ambitions in the South China Sea have led many analysts to warn that the risk of conflict in the region is rising. In response, the U.S. has deepened security partnerships in the Indo-Pacific, forming closer military ties with Japan, Australia, and the Philippines, among others.
Waltz’s appointment indicates that the Trump administration may be willing to go further in its commitments to Taiwan, potentially increasing arms sales and military training to enhance Taiwan’s defensive capabilities. However, such measures could provoke a strong reaction from Beijing, which considers Taiwan a breakaway province.
Economic tensions between the U.S. and China, already heightened by the previous trade war, may worsen if Waltz’s recommendation to prioritize defense spending and decouple strategic industries from China is implemented. Since the 2018 trade war, tariffs and sanctions have disrupted supply chains and prompted calls from both sides to reduce dependence on each other’s economy. Waltz and Kroenig’s article further suggests that economic policies could be reshaped to lessen reliance on Chinese goods and technology, perhaps even targeting areas like semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and rare earth materials critical to the U.S. tech sector.
Although Trump and his administration have expressed interest in negotiating “fairer” trade terms with China, the inclusion of more hawkish voices in his inner circle could lead to a more aggressive economic stance. Policies aimed at diversifying supply chains and reducing U.S. exposure to Chinese manufacturing could have significant economic repercussions, affecting everything from consumer goods to the tech industry.
Waltz’s proposal to resolve conflicts in the Middle East quickly could have wide-ranging consequences for U.S. relationships in the region. Withdrawing troops or scaling back engagement could alter the power dynamics, potentially allowing countries like Iran and Russia to expand their influence. Waltz’s article does not detail how the U.S. would manage such an exit or its aftereffects, but his appointment indicates that Trump’s administration may be prepared to take more significant steps toward disengagement.
If Trump does follow through on this plan, it will mark a stark contrast to previous U.S. administrations that invested heavily in Middle Eastern stability through military intervention and diplomatic initiatives. However, there are significant risks associated with a rapid exit strategy, including the resurgence of extremist groups and instability among key U.S. allies, such as Israel and Saudi Arabia. A diminished U.S. presence could also reduce Washington’s leverage in the region, further complicating efforts to contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
The international response to Waltz’s appointment has been mixed. While U.S. allies in Asia, particularly Japan and Australia, may welcome a stronger American commitment to countering China’s regional influence, European allies may be concerned about the potential reduction of U.S. involvement in NATO and the continent’s defense. A lessened focus on Ukraine could have repercussions for NATO’s eastern flank and complicate relations with Russia, which has capitalized on European divisions over Ukraine to expand its influence.
Countries in the Middle East may also have mixed reactions. While some leaders might support a reduced U.S. military presence, others, particularly in Israel and the Gulf, could see the U.S. pivot to Asia as a sign of waning American support in the face of Iranian aggression.
China, for its part, has consistently condemned U.S. efforts to build alliances aimed at containing its influence, framing such moves as interference in its internal affairs. Chinese leaders have cautioned the U.S. against adopting a Cold War mentality, warning that confrontation will lead to a “lose-lose” outcome.
